Yamuna Roller Flour Mills (P) Ltd vs State Of Kerala on 1 June, 2009

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 12291 of 2009(Q)


1. YAMUNA ROLLER FLOUR MILLS (P) LTD.,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA,
                       ...       Respondent

2. SRI.VENKITACHALAM,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.SAIBY JOSE KIDANGOOR

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR

 Dated :01/06/2009

 O R D E R
              M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J.

              ------------------------------------------
                W.P.C.NO.12291 OF 2009
              ------------------------------------------

                 Dated       1st     June 2009


                          JUDGMENT

             Petitioner          is       the        complainant   in

S.T.742/2009    on     the     file      of         Chief    Judicial

Magistrate,   Thrissur. Second respondent                     is the

accused.    Complaint       was      filed       before    the  Chief

Judicial Magistrate, Thrissur who had taken cognizance

of the offence on 18/3/2009. Under Ext.P2 order Chief

Judicial Magistrate after taking cognizance of the

offence on the file, made it over to the Judicial

First Class Magistrate, Kodungallur as provided under

Section 192 of Code of Criminal Procedure. Complainant

has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of

Constitution of India to quash Ext.P2 order and to

consider the grievance of the petitioner.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner was heard.

3. Learned counsel pointed out that petitioner

is a company with registered office at Thrissur and

accused/second respondent is in Coimbatore and Chief

WPC 12291/09
2

Judicial Magistrate made over the case to Kodungallur

which is 40 kilometers away from Thrissur and

petitioner was not heard before the transfer and if the

case is to be tried at Kodungallur another power of

attorney may have to be executed and another counsel

is also to be appointed and in such circumstances,

Ext.P2 order is to be quashed.

2. Learned counsel appearing for petitioner was

heard.

3. Section 192 of Code of Criminal Procedure

enables Chief Judicial Magistrate to make over the case

for enquiry or trial to a competent Magistrate

subordinate to him, after taking cognizance of the

offence. It is in exercise of the said power, Chief

Judicial Magistrate after taking cognizance of the

offence and taking the case on file as S.T.742/2009

made it over to Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kodungallur.

Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate did not consider the

question of convenience of the parties either the

complainant or accused, while making over the case to

Kodungallur. Grievance of the petitioner is that if

case is to be tried at Kodungallur, petitioner company

has to execute another power of attorney authorising

WPC 12291/09
3

the person to conduct the case at Kodungallur and also

engage another counsel. As Ext.P2 order was passed

without considering the grievance of the petitioner

Ext.P2 order to the extent of making the case over to

Chief Judicial Magistrate alone is quashed. Chief

Judicial Magistrate is directed to consider whether

the case could be tried by him or to make it over to

any of the Magistrate’s court at Thrissur after hearing

the complainant.

Writ petition is disposed.

M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,
JUDGE.

uj.